A document analysis system for supporting electronic voting research

DAS 2008 - Proceedings of the 8th IAPR International Workshop on Document Analysis Systems

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 167-174

  Lopresti, Daniel ^a   Nagy, George ^b   Smith, Elisa Barney ^c  

^a Lehigh University   (United States)

^b RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c Boise State University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTRONIC WARFARE; INTELLIGENT VEHICLE HIGHWAY SYSTEMS; MILITARY ELECTRONIC COUNTERMEASURES; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; TECHNICAL PRESENTATIONS;

CURRENT STATUSES; DOCUMENT ANALYSIS SYSTEMS; DOCUMENT IMAGES; ELECTRONIC VOTING; IN PROCESSING; RESEARCH PROJECTS;

PAPER;

EID: 57649143446     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/DAS.2008.75     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. Parties outline recount proposals with House control at stake, December 12 2006. www.whptv.com.
2. SAT process review: Answer sheet processing (final report). Booz Allen Hamilton, May 26 2006. http://www.collegeboard.com/sat/answersheetprocessing/ report.
3. The Machinery of Democracy: Protecting Elections in an Electronic World. Technical report, The Brennan Center Task Force on Voting System Security, June 27 2006. http://brennan.3cdn.net/52dbde32526fdc06db-4sm6b3kip.pdf.
4. W. Burr, J. Kelsey, R. Peralta, and J. Wack. Requiring software independence in VVSG 2007: STS recommendations for the TGDC. Technical report, National Institute of Standards and Technology, November 2006. http://vote.nist.gov/DraftWhitePaperOnSIinVVSG2007-20061120.pdf.
5. Secretary of State Top-to-Bottom Review of California Voting Systems, March 2008. http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections-vsr.htm.
6. A. J. Feldman, J. A. Halderman, and E. W. Felten. Security analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS voting machine. Technical report, Princeton Center for Information Technology, September 13 2006.
7. H. Hursti. The Black Box Report: Critical security issues with Diebold optical scan design. Technical report, Black Box Voting Project, July 4 2005.
8. H. Hursti. Diebold TSx evaluation: Critical security issues with Diebold TSx. Technical report, Black Box Voting Project, May 11 2006.
9. D. W. Jones. Counting mark-sense ballots, February 2002. http://www.cs.uiowa.edu/jones/voting/optical/.
10. A. Kiayias, L. Michel, A. Russell, and A. A. Shvartsman. Security assessment of the diebold optical scan voting terminal. Technical report, UConn Voting Technology Research Center, October 30 2006.
11. B. Klein, S. Agne, and A. D. Bagdanov. Understanding document analysis and understanding (through modeling). In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Document Analysis and Recognition (ICDAR '03), pages 1218-1222, Edinburgh, Scotland, August 2003.
12. B. Klein, S. Agne, and A. Dengel. Results of a study on invoice-reading systems in Germany. In S. Marinai and A. Dengel, editors, Document Analysis Systems VI, volume 3163 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 451-462. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2004.
13. B. Klein and A. R. Dengel. Problem-adaptable document analysis and understanding for high-volume applications. International Journal on Document Analysis and Recognition, 6(3): 167-180, March 2004.
14. T. Kohno, A. Stubblefield, A. D. Rubin, and D. S. Wallach. Analysis of an electronic voting system. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, May 2004.
15. M. Lausen. Design for Democracy: Ballot + Election Design. University of Chicago Press, 2007.
16. D. Lopresti and G. Nagy. Issues in ground-truthing graphic documents. In Proceedings of the Fourth IAPR International Workshop on Graphics Recognition, pages 59-72, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, September 2001.
17. D. Lopresti, A. Tomkins, J. Zhou, and J. Zhou. Systematic bias in OCR experiments. In Proceedings of Document Recognition II (IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging), pages 196-204, San Jose, CA, February 1995.
18. G. Nagy, D. Lopresti, A. Miller, and E. B. Smith. Election ballot test data. Submitted for publication, 2008.
19. Homepage for the Netpbm toolkit, 2008. http://netpbm.sourceforge.net.
20. Ohio Evaluation & Validation of Election-Related Equipment, Standards & Testing (EVEREST), March 2008. http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/info/ everest.aspx.
21. J. Ousterhout. Tcl and the Tk Toolkit. Addison-Wesley, 1994.
22. Paper and Electronic Records for Elections: Cultivating Trust (PERFECT), 2008. http://perfect.cse.lehigh.edu/.
23. M. A. Wertheimer. Trusted agent report: Diebold AccuVote-TS voting system. Technical report, RABA Innovative Solution Cell, January 20 2004.
24. K. Zetter. NH recount uncovers discrepancies - result of human error officials say. Wired Blog Network, January 22 2008. http://blog.wired.com/ 27bstroke6/2008/01/nh-recount-unco.html.
25. J. Zhou and D. Lopresti. Improving classifier performance through repeated sampling. Pattern Recognition, 30(10):1637-1650, 1997.